It has nothing to do with "benefiting" the characters / player... if the character in question is run by a person who, on an OOC level, is well-known for wreaking havoc wherever they go, why would you want to subject your organization / your new players to that? It's not really "creating" a toxic environment; it's more like dropping water purifying tablets into the water to keep the poisons at bay.
This is metagaming. I don't mean to cast your statement in a favourable or unfavourable light, but that is what it is.
First of all, you are taking the OOC knowledge that a character wreaks havoc wherever they go. How do you know that in-game? Do you have alts playing in that org, or interacting with that character to verify? Or are you, as a player, making assumptions and then just assimilating them by bringing OOC judgments into the game? Even if you do have an alt, how does that knowledge carry over to your other character?
If you want Lusternia to succeed, then you need to stop that toxic behaviour.
The cancer doesn't start with chaotic characters, it starts with your metagaming and exploiting OOC information.
"A man's not dead while his name is still spoken." - Terry Pratchett 1948-2015
It has nothing to do with "benefiting" the characters / player... if the character in question is run by a person who, on an OOC level, is well-known for wreaking havoc wherever they go, why would you want to subject your organization / your new players to that? It's not really "creating" a toxic environment; it's more like dropping water purifying tablets into the water to keep the poisons at bay.
This is metagaming. I don't mean to cast your statement in a favourable or unfavourable light, but that is what it is.
First of all, you are taking the OOC knowledge that a character wreaks havoc wherever they go. How do you know that in-game? Do you have alts playing in that org, or interacting with that character to verify? Or are you, as a player, making assumptions and then just assimilating them by bringing OOC judgments into the game? Even if you do have an alt, how does that knowledge carry over to your other character?
If you want Lusternia to succeed, then you need to stop that toxic behaviour.
The cancer doesn't start with chaotic characters, it starts with your metagaming and exploiting OOC information.
It has to do with things that the player does on OOC mediums (such as forums and facebook). If the player is an individual who, on every medium that they communicate with the rest of the playerbase, acting like a troll? No, I feel no qualms about having my character acknowledge even vague hints of the character's mis-behaviours as "troubling" and requiring "additional investigation" before they are accepted in.
I'm willing to give people a chance, but if they show absolutely no interest in being a productive, beneficial, and non-toxic member of the organization? I don't really see why trolls need to be welcomed with open arms.
7
Cyndarinused Flamethrower! It was super effective.
edited March 2014
What Xenthos said. The reality is that there is a human element to the game, and sometimes the best avenue is combat a bad influence is to force it out. It's extremely rare, but there are simply some players that like to start fires and watch things burn. When the choice is between 1 a-hole or 10 newbies and nice players, it's a pretty easy decision. Maybe it's toxic, but so is chemotherapy.
Edit: yes, it is meta gaming. No, I don't care. I'm not the type that can be shamed for having to get my hands dirty to fix a problem, nor the type to feel compelled to justify how I handle grade a a-holes. Ends justify the means and all that jazz.
It has to do with things that the player does on OOC mediums (such as forums and facebook). If the player is an individual who, on every medium that they communicate with the rest of the playerbase, acting like a troll? No, I feel no qualms about having my character acknowledge even vague hints of the character's mis-behaviours as "troubling" and requiring "additional investigation" before they are accepted in.
I'm willing to give people a chance, but if they show absolutely no interest in being a productive, beneficial, and non-toxic member of the organization? I don't really see why trolls need to be welcomed with open arms.
That is disappointing. I don't think you are doing the game a favour by exempting others from getting into an org based on OOC motivations. I would invite you to reevaluate those beliefs if you really want Lusternia to continue growing and expanding.
It is a bit arrogant to assume that your own, singular judgment(an OOC judgment, by the way) determines who can or cannot add to the game experience. You might not like that individual OOC, but there is a large chance they can keep new players around, serve as a reason for them to login, spend money on credits(thus supporting the game), take on positions in the city, etc.
You cannot know who will be able to add to the game, and in what capacity.
"A man's not dead while his name is still spoken." - Terry Pratchett 1948-2015
It has to do with things that the player does on OOC mediums (such as forums and facebook). If the player is an individual who, on every medium that they communicate with the rest of the playerbase, acting like a troll? No, I feel no qualms about having my character acknowledge even vague hints of the character's mis-behaviours as "troubling" and requiring "additional investigation" before they are accepted in.
I'm willing to give people a chance, but if they show absolutely no interest in being a productive, beneficial, and non-toxic member of the organization? I don't really see why trolls need to be welcomed with open arms.
That is disappointing. I don't think you are doing the game a favour by exempting others from getting into an org based on OOC motivations. I would invite you to reevaluate those beliefs if you really want Lusternia to continue growing and expanding.
It is a bit arrogant to assume that your own, singular judgment(an OOC judgment, by the way) determines who can or cannot add to the game experience. You might not like that individual OOC, but there is a large chance they can keep new players around, serve as a reason for them to login, spend money on credits(thus supporting the game), take on positions in the city, etc.
You cannot know who will be able to add to the game, and in what capacity.
But I can definitely know what an individual will detract from the game.
But I can definitely know what an individual will detract from the game.
You can know what it detracts for you, personally. You can't know what it detracts for other people, because you're not them.
Supporting the game means not thinking about just you, and what you want.
In any case, we may not see eye to eye on this topic, but I have to say I am a little shocked.
Of course there is a human element, which is difficult, if not impossible to police. But what I'm hearing sounds more like absolute irreverence for roleplay, rather than the occasion mistake.
"A man's not dead while his name is still spoken." - Terry Pratchett 1948-2015
0
Cyndarinused Flamethrower! It was super effective.
edited March 2014
Some of us just happen to believe there are more important things than strict adherence to role playing, such as a healthy environment for the players. The people are more important than the characters.
But I can definitely know what an individual will detract from the game.
You can know what it detracts for you, personally. You can't know what it detracts for other people, because you're not them.
Supporting the game means not thinking about just you, and what you want.
In any case, we may not see eye to eye on this topic, but I have to say I am a little shocked.
Of course there is a human element, which is difficult, if not impossible to police. But what I'm hearing sounds more like absolute irreverence for roleplay, rather than the occasion mistake.
Roleplay is absolutely important. On the other hand, this is also a game. Games are meant to be enjoyable. If a person (the actual player) plays the game in such a way as to make it unenjoyable for others... what I'm hearing from you is that you feel that's a-okay.
It's not.
It's like when we have discussions on Envoys about roleplay vs. mechanics. You need to find the right balance between the two. Sometimes a mechanic has to work a certain way even though it is not meant to, for balance reasons (read: player enjoyment), and so it is made to work that way. We have to work around the little roleplay hiccouph.
Some of us just happen to believe there are more important things than strict adherence to role playing, such as a healthy environment for the players. The people are more important than the characters.
I agree, people are more important than characters.
From what I'm receiving through this conversation - this is less to do with the players, the characters, or the game, and more to do with compulsive control.
It isn't that you aren't strictly adhering to roleplay, you are metaplaying under the cloak of creating a healthy environment. Players OOCly dictating who is allowed to come into the org isn't a healthy environment at all. It cannot even be called roleplay at all.
"A man's not dead while his name is still spoken." - Terry Pratchett 1948-2015
0
Cyndarinused Flamethrower! It was super effective.
Lol. You wouldn't be able to name a single example of when it's actually happened, therefor you lack the ability to substantiate a claim that it's about control. You simply have no foundation of evidence to back that accusation.
Roleplay is absolutely important. On the other hand, this is also a game. Games are meant to be enjoyable. If a person (the actual player) plays the game in such a way as to make it unenjoyable for others... what I'm hearing from you is that you feel that's a-okay.
Right, games are meant to be enjoyable. If one other player makes you upset or you do not want to interact with them, that is what snub is for. But when you assume that you have the right to police your org by metagaming, saying it is 'for the sake of the players', you are lying.
You cannot claim that the game is automatically unenjoyable for everyone because you personally don't like that person. It's disrespectful to act like you know what everyone else enjoys about the game.
If the presence of one character can upset you that much, then it is time to step back from the keyboard and take a break.
What I am hearing from you is that it's a-okay to ruin the enjoyment of the game for someone who wants to play in your org, because you are biased against them OOCly.
"A man's not dead while his name is still spoken." - Terry Pratchett 1948-2015
Some of us just happen to believe there are
more important things than strict adherence to role playing, such as a
healthy environment for the players. The people are more important than
the characters.
I agree, people are more important than characters.
From
what I'm receiving through this conversation - this is less to do with
the players, the characters, or the game, and more to do with compulsive
control.
It isn't that you aren't strictly
adhering to roleplay, you are metaplaying under the cloak of creating a
healthy environment. Players OOCly dictating who is allowed to come into
the org isn't a healthy environment at all. It cannot even be called
roleplay at all.
If it was "compulsive control," then people like Sojiro, Hiriako, and so
on would be banned. These are players who acted in an in-character
fashion to great extent to damage the organization they later went on to
join. However, they were not banned; they had to roleplay their way
in, and eventually did (to great success).
This sort of discussion only happens with specific
characters who act a certain way, for whom there is a general consensus
(note that it's not "one person" blocking it, but the entire group of
people who have that authority who have reviewed the situation and
decided that it will just be a massive headache). There's an easy
solution for this; instead of trolling the community, a person could
instead try joining the community. An active, happy participant who
thrives on interaction instead of divisiveness would be a great boon for
us all.
Some of us just happen to believe there are more important things than strict adherence to role playing, such as a healthy environment for the players. The people are more important than the characters.
I agree, people are more important than characters.
From what I'm receiving through this conversation - this is less to do with the players, the characters, or the game, and more to do with compulsive control.
It isn't that you aren't strictly adhering to roleplay, you are metaplaying under the cloak of creating a healthy environment. Players OOCly dictating who is allowed to come into the org isn't a healthy environment at all. It cannot even be called roleplay at all.
Tetra tries White-Knighting! It's not very effective......
As for "not knowing what will add to or detract from" the game, I'm calling shenanigans. I've dealt with Makodi as four seperate characters. Each time, I gave him the benefit of the doubt and tried to be friendly with him (except for the one case where he ended up in my guild and refused to actually do anything.)
Each time, he either sat at the nexus and did stuff like spamming an illusion (spook, I think it was) or poked and prodded other novices who were actually interested in doing their college tasks, and pulled them off track. It has nothing to do with control, and everything to do with having to deal with your duties as not only a mentor in Lusternia and a guild elder/teacher, but dealing with someone who, even if I hadnt read this post, I would know he is intentionally being annoying and/or intentionally not allowing others around them to enjoy the game.
Everiine said: The reason population is low isn't because there are too many orgs. It's because so many facets of the game are outright broken and protected by those who benefit from it being that way. An overabundance of gimmicks (including game-breaking ones), artifacts that destroy any concept of balance, blatant pay-to-win features, and an obsession with convenience that makes few things actually worthwhile all contribute to the game's sad decline.
This sort of discussion only happens with specific
characters who act a certain way, for whom there is a general consensus
(note that it's not "one person" blocking it, but the entire group of
people who have that authority who have reviewed the situation and
decided that it will just be a massive headache). There's an easy
solution for this; instead of trolling the community, a person could
instead try joining the community. An active, happy participant who
thrives on interaction instead of divisiveness would be a great boon for
us all.
So because everyone does it or agrees, that makes it more acceptable? I imagine this discussion is still OOC, which doesn't really shift the metric of the problem.
Regarding control. I meant on a more human level. There was someone who told me they would only play with other characters who had 'a certain style of name'. I feel like this whole concept you have explained about creating a healthy environment is more of an OCD pattern or habit which has been adopted by the playerbase.
"A man's not dead while his name is still spoken." - Terry Pratchett 1948-2015
This sort of discussion only happens with specific
characters who act a certain way, for whom there is a general consensus
(note that it's not "one person" blocking it, but the entire group of
people who have that authority who have reviewed the situation and
decided that it will just be a massive headache). There's an easy
solution for this; instead of trolling the community, a person could
instead try joining the community. An active, happy participant who
thrives on interaction instead of divisiveness would be a great boon for
us all.
So because everyone does it or agrees, that makes it more acceptable? I imagine this discussion is still OOC, which doesn't really shift the metric of the problem.
Regarding control. I meant on a more human level. There was someone who told me they would only play with other characters who had 'a certain style of name'. I feel like this whole concept you have explained about creating a healthy environment is more of an OCD pattern or habit which has been adopted by the playerbase.
And I feel like "not wanting to interact with people who are around for the sole intent of stirring up trouble" is an absolutely normal human behaviour which has nothing to do with patterns or habits of a small cluster of people, but instead has everything to do with human nature.
I'm seeing a pattern here, now that Xenthos mentions it. /chin
Everiine said: The reason population is low isn't because there are too many orgs. It's because so many facets of the game are outright broken and protected by those who benefit from it being that way. An overabundance of gimmicks (including game-breaking ones), artifacts that destroy any concept of balance, blatant pay-to-win features, and an obsession with convenience that makes few things actually worthwhile all contribute to the game's sad decline.
I gave Makodi very undesirable traits, so I was curious on other characters opinion of him
Back on topic for a second, don't mind me.
I've only met your character once, so I can't really give a proper opinion on him, but the impression I got from when I did talk to you ICly was that Makodi was basically that one college friend who is always trying to get his other friends to go out partying instead of studying, thus bringing down their grade point average. So he wasn't really annoying so much to me as disesteemed.
And I feel like "not wanting to interact with people who are around for the sole intent of stirring up trouble" is an absolutely normal human behaviour which has nothing to do with patterns or habits of a small cluster of people, but instead has everything to do with human nature.
Normality is a majority opinion. That doesn't make it better or healthy for the game.
So because the playerbase has slowly gravitated towards cliquish quasi-OOC behaviour, that is normal. Sometimes what we want is not always what is best, especially in regards to the state of the game.
"A man's not dead while his name is still spoken." - Terry Pratchett 1948-2015
And I feel like "not wanting to interact with people who are around for the sole intent of stirring up trouble" is an absolutely normal human behaviour which has nothing to do with patterns or habits of a small cluster of people, but instead has everything to do with human nature.
Normality is a majority opinion. That doesn't make it better or healthy for the game.
So because the playerbase has slowly gravitated towards cliquish quasi-OOC behaviour, that is normal. Sometimes what we want is not always what is best, especially in regards to the state of the game.
An antipathy towards trolling is not cliquish. :P
2
Cyndarinused Flamethrower! It was super effective.
Man this argument is getting dumb. Alleging OCD control issues is just ugh. Get your money back in that PhD, Dr. Tetra. The ugly bitchy truth is that I can, and as a top PKer, you can't really stop me. So in other words...I don't care. The end.
By great, I mean, highly amusing in a Monty Python slapstick sort of way.
Sorry to burst your bubble Tetra, but there is absolutely no way to not be influenced by OOC influences.
There are certain people who I know I would dislike their attitude or personality OOCly, and I avoid that person at all costs ICly. That's not out of the ordinary, that's normal. It's also pretty easy to make up IC reasons to keep them out of your city/guild/family if you have the ability to do so. That's normal. And usually called RP.
Kind of like your dreamweaving narrative.
2014/04/19 01:38:01 - Leolamins drained 2000000 power to raise Silvanus as a Vernal Ascendant.
2014/07/23 05:01:29 - Silvanus drained 2000000 power to raise Munsia as a Vernal Ascendant.
2015/05/24 06:03:07 - Silvanus drained 2000000 power to raise Arimisia as a Vernal Ascendant.
2015/05/24 06:03:58 - Silvanus drained 2000000 power to raise Lavinya as a Vernal Ascendant.
Regarding cliques and norms being constructs of "popular" society, I'd like to point out that the common form of dealing with misbehavior in many cultures was, and is, ostracism.
The above is a quote from the book "The Nature of Politics" by Roger D. Masters.
Ostracizing troublemakers is a completely normal response by a group of humans.
11
EveriineWise Old Swordsbird / BrontaurIndianapolis, IN, USA
I think there is also a difference between "Wow, that character is annoying, I don't like him, let's kick him out," and, "Wow, multiple reports over a span of time from different sources all tell the same story: this player is creating characters whose sole purpose seems to be being a disruptive, damaging, toxic presence. This has been collaborated by x, y, z, a, b, c, and d, and the pattern is quite clear. Attempts to change the damaging player behavior have failed: therefore, the player is being ostracized."
Tetra is arguing that the former is happening--others are arguing the right to do the latter.
Much as I would hate to admit it, being that I like to keep RP pretty strict, and I've dealt with obnoxious players before, when the line is crossed and a dick character is a dick character because the player is being a dick player, the only way to deal with the situation is on an OOC level. It cannot be RP'd, because the dick player is projecting into a dick character.
And Person X being a jerk is a perfectly valid IC and RP reason not to allow someone into an organization.
Everiine is a man, and is very manly. This MAN before you is so manly you might as well just gender bend right now, cause he's the manliest man that you ever did see. His manly shape has spurned many women and girlyer men to boughs of fainting. He stands before you in a manly manerific typical man-like outfit which is covered in his manly motto: "I am a man!"
Daraius said: You gotta risk it for the biscuit.
Pony power all the way, yo. The more Brontaurs the better.
Man this argument is getting dumb. Alleging OCD control issues is just ugh. Get your money back in that PhD, Dr. Tetra. The ugly bitchy truth is that I can, and as a top PKer, you can't really stop me. So in other words...I don't care. The end.
It doesn't take a PhD to observe other people's behaviour and come to a reasonable conclusion.
Let's not get worked up over it. Who said I have any intention of stopping you? I'm telling you that you are metagaming. That doesn't mean I have any interest in interfering with how you choose to play the game, because I respect the boundary that other people have the right to play how they wish. That doesn't mean I am going to condone or agree with your actions.
Everiine, you have the right train of thought. But I would expand on it a little bit more.
When someone is being a dick player, who is the one making that judgment call? Our OOC self, or the character? That is a line that everyone inevitably has to draw. When someone is bothering you to the point that you get upset as a player, snubbing would be the best solution. But dripping OOC biases into the game world because as Celina says, 'you can', is rather unhealthy.
Ostracizing troublemakers may be considered a normal human behaviour, but first it requires you to be aware that such a sequence of events occurred.
This is less about the act of ostracism and more about the difference between your character(in the game) & your human ego. If you are polluting the game environment with your OOC biases, you are not respecting the boundaries of roleplay. Plain and simple, no arguments about that.
There is a difference between being influenced by your out-of-character tastes, but still roleplaying your character to its fullest extent, and then solely playing based on your OOC knowledge and masquerading under the guise of "roleplay".
The fact that I kill Taint and Soulless as a dreamweaver has nothing to do with OOC biases whatsoever. It has everything to do with my character's beliefs and the org that he is tied to. Saying it is impossible to draw a line in the sand is a sorry excuse for someone who doesn't even attempt to roleplay. Rather, it is a perfect example of someone treating Lusternia like a common chatroom.
We all metagame, be it on a conscious or subconscious level. To proclaim otherwise is to lie to yourself. I have nothing against Makodi's player, per se. You want to RP annoying? Deal with the consequences of your character's actions. Text life isn't a far cry from real life. So we have fur, elf ears, horns and wings, at the core of all this? Real people (shocking, i know), and I applaud all who try to make Lusternia a realistic and enjoyable place, as well as take the time to ensure there is a healthy atmosphere for the nontoxic nooblets who come our way! Good job guys!
Mysrai strokes the
decapitated head of Persayis tenderly.
Ostracizing troublemakers may be considered a normal human behaviour, but first it requires you to be aware that such a sequence of events occurred.
This is less about the act of ostracism and more about the difference between your character(in the game) & your human ego. If you are polluting the game environment with your OOC biases, you are not respecting the boundaries of roleplay. Plain and simple, no arguments about that.
In order for a character to be roleplayed in the first place in Lusternia, you need a living, sentient being with a way to deliver their thoughts somehow to a device that transmits it to the game. Human, alien, dog, I don't care what it is. In our case, to the best of my knowledge, we are all humans. One of you may be a dog, and I would never know, because it's the internet, but that's besides the point.
Our characters are not automated. They are us. To play our characters we must draw from ourselves, our very real experiences, to make decisions. Is it impossible to play a character completely disconnected to who you are? No, it's not. But if you cannot see a link at all between you and your character, not even a small one, then you have some serious compartmentalization going on that is likely unhealthy. Perhaps it's not unhealthy in your opinion, but if that's the case, I suggest you refer to your cultural beliefs, which may include a trip to a (medical, witch, spiritual) doctor.
If a character is being ostracized because the players of other characters do not enjoy the presence of said player, that is normal. This wouldn't be a discussion if this was an in-person D&D game with one jerk who badmouthed other players or looked to stir drama between players. Or any of these other common examples, either. You'd be told off and told to get lost, likely by popular vote of those in the game, and they may never play with you again. This is an example of ostracization of a player and thereby a character. The player may be pissed off, but they're not going to go, "I was playing my character correctly, why do I have to leave!" unless they're completely incapable of seeing how they were being a jerk. They may then proceed to hold a grudge if they lack the presence of mind to ask what offenses they have committed to the group and seek to rectify them or move on.
The other situation is when a player has a consistent sort of character without the player themselves being one who can be interacted with. Typecasting is what it's called in acting, when a role is played consistently by a single actor/actress. Sometimes it is because the actor/actress are liked by others in that role and what brings in money, brings in money. This is not the case with a game like Lusternia, where it is 100% up to the player what sort of character they want to roleplay as. If you want to roleplay as an irritating character, that's your call. If you want to roleplay a fluffbunny, that's your call. If you want to roleplay a mass murderer who is scared of potatoes, that's your call.
If you consistently play one role in such a case, it is because you enjoy that role or because it is the one you are able to do most easily. If you are playing characters that are consistently jerks and show no hint of decency in an OOC medium, or consistently fail to prove to the community of said roleplaying game that you are a member of the community to be at least tolerated, people of said community - the other players - will come to label you as a jerk, most likely.
This game may be an online game, but we are a community nonetheless. If a player is being a jerk, we as players will naturally seek to remove the player. Ostracism.
There's an easy
solution for this; instead of trolling the community, a person could
instead try joining the community. An active, happy participant who
thrives on interaction instead of divisiveness would be a great boon for
us all.
Nobody can divide you without your permission.
If someone is a troll, does the playerbase decide if they can or cannot be a part of the community? The community supersedes our personal opinions, it does not operate through exclusivity.
The game's community is made up of equal parts that include everyone playing the game, it is not an "elite club" where you decide who is a member and who isn't.
What you are referring to is a clique.
"A man's not dead while his name is still spoken." - Terry Pratchett 1948-2015
There's an easy
solution for this; instead of trolling the community, a person could
instead try joining the community. An active, happy participant who
thrives on interaction instead of divisiveness would be a great boon for
us all.
Nobody can divide you without your permission.
If someone is a troll, does the playerbase decide if they can or cannot be a part of the community? The community supersedes our personal opinions, it does not operate through exclusivity.
The game's community is made up of equal parts that include everyone playing the game, it is not an "elite club" where you decide who is a member and who isn't.
What you are referring to is a clique.
No, it is not. Let's look at the definition of a "clique".
"A narrow exclusive circle or group of persons." or "A small group of people who spend time together and who are not friendly to other people."
Now, let us look at who is posting in this thread; you have people from all communities, and all social circles, replying to you saying the opposite of what you think. You are attempting to dismiss them all by referring to them as a "clique," but you're not even looking at things. I have no OOC contact with, say, Everiine (or Silvanus, or really even Lavinya). I'm certainly not part of their circles, nor they of mine. This is an issue which unites many disparate members of the Lusternian community, and which we can come together in agreement upon; the game is better when people actually want to play together, not when people just want to incite angst and frustration.
Comments
"A man's not dead while his name is still spoken." - Terry Pratchett 1948-2015
I'm willing to give people a chance, but if they show absolutely no interest in being a productive, beneficial, and non-toxic member of the organization? I don't really see why trolls need to be welcomed with open arms.
"A man's not dead while his name is still spoken." - Terry Pratchett 1948-2015
"A man's not dead while his name is still spoken." - Terry Pratchett 1948-2015
It's not.
It's like when we have discussions on Envoys about roleplay vs. mechanics. You need to find the right balance between the two. Sometimes a mechanic has to work a certain way even though it is not meant to, for balance reasons (read: player enjoyment), and so it is made to work that way. We have to work around the little roleplay hiccouph.
"A man's not dead while his name is still spoken." - Terry Pratchett 1948-2015
"A man's not dead while his name is still spoken." - Terry Pratchett 1948-2015
This sort of discussion only happens with specific characters who act a certain way, for whom there is a general consensus (note that it's not "one person" blocking it, but the entire group of people who have that authority who have reviewed the situation and decided that it will just be a massive headache). There's an easy solution for this; instead of trolling the community, a person could instead try joining the community. An active, happy participant who thrives on interaction instead of divisiveness would be a great boon for us all.
Tetra tries White-Knighting!
It's not very effective......
As for "not knowing what will add to or detract from" the game, I'm calling shenanigans. I've dealt with Makodi as four seperate characters. Each time, I gave him the benefit of the doubt and tried to be friendly with him (except for the one case where he ended up in my guild and refused to actually do anything.)
Each time, he either sat at the nexus and did stuff like spamming an illusion (spook, I think it was) or poked and prodded other novices who were actually interested in doing their college tasks, and pulled them off track. It has nothing to do with control, and everything to do with having to deal with your duties as not only a mentor in Lusternia and a guild elder/teacher, but dealing with someone who, even if I hadnt read this post, I would know he is intentionally being annoying and/or intentionally not allowing others around them to enjoy the game.
"A man's not dead while his name is still spoken." - Terry Pratchett 1948-2015
"A man's not dead while his name is still spoken." - Terry Pratchett 1948-2015
By great, I mean, highly amusing in a Monty Python slapstick sort of way.
Sorry to burst your bubble Tetra, but there is absolutely no way to not be influenced by OOC influences.
There are certain people who I know I would dislike their attitude or personality OOCly, and I avoid that person at all costs ICly. That's not out of the ordinary, that's normal. It's also pretty easy to make up IC reasons to keep them out of your city/guild/family if you have the ability to do so. That's normal. And usually called RP.
Kind of like your dreamweaving narrative.
Tetra is arguing that the former is happening--others are arguing the right to do the latter.
Much as I would hate to admit it, being that I like to keep RP pretty strict, and I've dealt with obnoxious players before, when the line is crossed and a dick character is a dick character because the player is being a dick player, the only way to deal with the situation is on an OOC level. It cannot be RP'd, because the dick player is projecting into a dick character.
And Person X being a jerk is a perfectly valid IC and RP reason not to allow someone into an organization.
"A man's not dead while his name is still spoken." - Terry Pratchett 1948-2015
Mysrai strokes the decapitated head of Persayis tenderly.
---------------------------------------------------
Mysrai Thrice-Crowned intones, "DZA NA III."
You say, "Dzaa."
You nod your head emphatically.
Mysrai nods solemnly.
Mysrai gives you a peck on the cheek.
Reality solidifies, mending itself into a single paradigm as Mysrai departs.
Mysrai strokes the decapitated head of Persayis tenderly.
---------------------------------------------------
Mysrai Thrice-Crowned intones, "DZA NA III."
You say, "Dzaa."
You nod your head emphatically.
Mysrai nods solemnly.
Mysrai gives you a peck on the cheek.
Reality solidifies, mending itself into a single paradigm as Mysrai departs.
"A man's not dead while his name is still spoken." - Terry Pratchett 1948-2015
No, it is not. Let's look at the definition of a "clique".
"A narrow exclusive circle or group of persons." or "A small group of people who spend time together and who are not friendly to other people."
Now, let us look at who is posting in this thread; you have people from all communities, and all social circles, replying to you saying the opposite of what you think. You are attempting to dismiss them all by referring to them as a "clique," but you're not even looking at things. I have no OOC contact with, say, Everiine (or Silvanus, or really even Lavinya). I'm certainly not part of their circles, nor they of mine. This is an issue which unites many disparate members of the Lusternian community, and which we can come together in agreement upon; the game is better when people actually want to play together, not when people just want to incite angst and frustration.